Ex parte SAKAMOTO - Page 7




          Appeal No. 1997-1369                                                        
          Application No. 08/224,588                                                  




          13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as unpatentable over                
          the combined disclosures of Dickey, Heitmann, Breuers and                   
          Ryan.  Claims 4 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as              
          unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Dickey,                       
          Heitmann, Breuers and Bottomley.                                            
               We have carefully evaluated the claims, specification and              
          applied prior art, including all of the arguments advanced by               
          the examiner and appellant in support of their respective                   
          positions.  This evaluation leads us to conclude that the                   
          examiner’s                                                                  
           103 rejections are not well founded.  For the reasons well                
          articulated by appellant at pages 9 through 16 of his Brief,                
          we conclude that the examiner has not established a prima                   
          facie case of obviousness within the meaning of 35 U.S.C.                  
          103.  We only add that the examiner has not properly given                  
          weight to the recited means-plus-function elements,                         
          particularly the recited “actuator means,” in claims 1 and 8                
          consistent with 35 U.S.C.                                                   
           112, paragraph 6.  See Al-Site Corp. v. VSI Int'l, Inc.,                  


                                          7                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007